leagueoflegendsfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:Cho'Gath/@comment-3529242-20170715184817/@comment-4091261-20170716070343
I agree wholeheartedly. The worst league of legends players rely on a false sense of certainty when in truth, there is such a wide range of scenarios that the perfect scenarios people believe in happen once every 20 games, and these scenarios don't even bring them victory. These players have rigid expectations that offer no compromise. Then people get frustrated at the fact that players aren't playing in the cookie-cutter pillsbury doughboy fashion of their dreams. They are legitimately surprised that the bronze player on the team isn't pulling off challenger level plays. Now, it isn't wrong to have a moderate level of expectations in mind. Like playing with victory in mind. Expecting players to have less than 500ms variance in their ping is legitimate. However, way too frequently do some players push the expectations to unwarranted levels. For example, expecting the support tank to jump into a 2v5 to go for a pentakill with a 0/7/0 score. Expecting the ally to tank for the . Expectations that are far off the rails, so that you can't possibly be expecting victory with these thoughts in mind. ---- These expectations are only legitimate with concrete certainty. Indubitable logic. Not probabilistic facts, rather deterministic facts. Not inductive reasoning, but deductive reasoning. Facts true enough that truth is defined from their existence. With that in mind, it is quite ridiculous how certain people are in their judgements about how someone will play a champion. The only thing that can be truly known is that a player can see that champion with all its mechanics in the game alongside the player. Probabilistic facts are useful in their own right, they can explain what could happen in a specific scenario. However, once the case gets broader and broader, the significance of these facts become levels that are completely irrelevant. ---- It's only useful to expect how a person will play a champion. However, there are expectations of how every person in a rank will play a champion, then expectations of how every person in a region will play a champion. Even expectations of how every player in the world will play a champion. When looking at the scale of what we are expecting, the range is too vast. Nothing can be expected anymore at a certain point. Surely there is still an average performance, but then you have deviations that stretch from wood trash to tournament king. So while the average performances may move a bit, the deviations and their prevalence make the differences negligible. So people making absolute judgements about how a champion is going to perform is just absurd. The only legitimacy in these judgements is in the higher ranks with draft picks. Judging what will happen in low ranks is extremely vague since actual performance can vary all over the place. Judging what will happen in random normal blind pick is completely idiotic since people are coming in at differing ranks and players have no idea what enemies they are up against. ---- Since these probabilities are difficult to rely on. What we can grasp are the raw mechanics and the physical stats of a champion. If is mechanically easier than other champions, then he's more reliable than other champions. There are a lot of stuff to think about when putting a champion in a role. For support, some things to think about are: *What support item works best for him? **How does this support item compare to the first item would build in other lanes? *How significant are his costs early on? **If his costs are significant, can he still perform well while building to fix these problems? *When mid-game starts rolling around, what items will work well in teamfights? **Are these items more important than fully upgraded boots? **If a non-support item works amazingly well, how does the compare to the Eye alternatives? **Will the support items be enough to support the purchase of the following item? ***Will the first item, that isn't in the support lineup, be enough to support the purchase of each following item? *Does the timing of the purchase of each item align with the ranking of each skill as he continues to level up? **What values are there to ranking up each ability? ***How do these values aid/interfere with supporting your allies? ****Does the ability support allies better during the early laning phase or while teamfighting? ****How does your item choice fix the interference and amplify the supportive values? *What are the vulnerabilities of his kit? **Who can take advantage of the weaknesses? **How can he overcome these weaknesses? ***How does the method of patching these weaknesses contrast with maximizing supportive capability? ***How does the lacking value impact any further assumptions? ****How can he recreate a solid foundation to recover from? **What can take advantage of these weaknesses? ***How can he overcome these new weaknesses? ****What does he lose from patching this weakness? *****How does the lacking value impact any further assumptions? *What tools does he have to win the game? **How can he optimize the usage of these tools? **How will he get these tools? **Does his tools for victory rely on other tools? ***What could prevent him from obtaining the tools for victory? ****What can he do to recover these tools for victory? *****How will he recover these tools for victory? ****Is his path to victory broken by an individual or a group? *****How can he defeat the individual? *****How can he circumvent the group? **How significantly does his tools for victory rely on his allies? ***If allies are not doing well, how can he overcome this? ****Is it easier to fix your allies' problems or to amplify your allies' values? ---- It's only after raw comparisons that we utilize the most probable events to forecast events. Even so, we all know how weekly weather forecasts can be inaccurate--same goes for itemization. As one moves along their build, assumptions stack on top other assumptions, and the chances become slim when that happens. Due to the meta, it is likely that will be up against a ranged champion. It's a bit obvious, but it also raises the obvious question of how well does he handle kiting? Since he is also against a support, it raises the question of how he handles the various CC and buffs? After the evaluation of this, it shows how his gold income will look like as the greater control over the lane means better use out of the support item. This is something that should be compared with other supports since they compete for greater control. Also, knowing how much aggression one can exhibit against certain enemies can forecast what kind of item is possible early on. Since everything beyond this diverges into excessive scenarios, knowing how to categorize certain situations will help get a grasp of how to achieve the best results. While scenarios will diverge, they most certainly have parts that converge to a specific conclusion. Knowing these conclusions and recognizing when a situation is leading to it will help in preparing for it. It is these things that create grand turnabouts that seemingly comes out of nowhere. ---- If all these questions can be adequately answered and applied, then it will absolutely work. All things that do not work will have a flaw somewhere in this evaluation, which is specifically for supports. Some people are too shallow and will immediately dub ideas, they don't understand, trolling and int'ing. They spend all their time in despair, "Oh woe is me, to have this fuckboi on my team." They play as if their whole life depends on your decision, and just because their beliefs do not align with the reality they see, they feel anxiety, despair, and frustration. As a result, they feel the need to lash out at the individual the entire game, never even considering the fact that it can work even better for them than the picks they are used to. Despair has no place in this situation. If you don't know who is on the other side of the screen of the players you are with, then it's not even worth feeling sad about what the other players decide to do. Hell, it's not even worth thinking about what the other players decide to do. Working under the assumption that these people are playing with victory in mind, it's best to change one's perspective. You are not working with 5 individuals to win a single game. You trying to win your own game. It just so happens that 4 other individuals are trying to win the same game. You only work together under a social contract. So long as interests align and the net sum of cooperation is worth more than the individual gains of dividing, we will work together. Who are we? We are me. Helping your teammates is helping yourself. Their game is your game. Helping them win their game, is the same as you helping yourself win your own game. Ignoring your teammates is ignoring yourself. Making it difficult for everyone to win the game, makes it harder for you to win the game. Despair is debilitating. The more one thinks about how much one does not know, the less one actually does. An innate issue people have is that when they see a bad situation, they want to flee from it--surrender to their fate. Rather, people should treat it as an exciting challenge and either close their mind and have faith in their instincts or remove their fears and proceed with zealous intent. Even so, players will inevitably start the game thoughts of despair when seeing something they can't comprehend. Players should approach uncertainty with curiosity rather than frustration. When seeing someone try something you don't quite understand, remove all anger by imagining the possible gains the option has and asking what the gameplan is. Then recognize all the value of this unknown strategy and it will naturally move towards the zealous pursuit which is natural for this game. ---- If you do plan on playing support, with randoms, you must be prepared to give a full length explanation. Not so much for everyone on the team to understand it, but for everyone to know that you understand it. It's a quite strong case to point out the weaknesses of the meta picks and to present how overcomes them---like the example--every single time you physically overcome it in game.